• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The manual was outdated when the game was published. I disagree with all(?) your conclusions and most of your assumptions. I suggest you to explore AoD 1.08 without prejudices. It has some weaknesses, true. But asking the game to follow a very outdated manual is just wrong.

Is the manual really outdated, or has the game just developed into a line that does not much represent the manual anymore?

Is it an outdated concept that convoys can create supply depots from which secondary convoys can run shorter routes to the final supply destinations? Which is the more outdated concept? Run every supply convoy from a land trace to the capital or (using USA as an example) run main convoy from USA West Coast to Hawaii, and from Hawaii run all the final convoys to their end supply depots - as the manual instructs.

I would counter to you that the manual is pure genius in its intents to provide a game with great enhancements, and - while it is impossible to state that v1.07 is outdated - it is most certainly a valid point of view to state that the game has not achieved the vision of the manual in more ways than one. So, the present game is still "way back" from the manual in many ways - and when newer updates further diminish the genius apparent in the manual (such as allowing leader promotion without skill penalty) - I would say that the current game is "going backwards" as regards that feature.

To be fair, on the other side each newer version has made major improvements in tackling very difficult game engine mechanics, and succeeded in major improvements in most areas. But I am most sorry that - in certain ways - the tendency has been to negate the manual to the realm of "outdated" instead of looking at where the game has in specific areas missed totally the vision printed in the manual.
 
Last edited:
Are there no spam filters on this forum?

I didn't know if it was spam, or somebody trying to hijack my thread, or actually a most clever personal message for me!
 
At least with auto-promotion you could not always guarantee that Guderian became a skill 5 field marshal as soon as he hit the table.

Sure, Major Generals gain skill faster than Field Marshals, but still.

I'm currently in my first (hopefully not last) AoD game and it doesn't feel right.

I'll second that. You hit the nail right on the head. "The game doesn't feel right" as regards this leader revision. Guderian being a Skill 5 Field Marshall "as soon as he hits the table" is simply - how do I say this nicely - well, I guess by now you probably know what my favorite expletive might be to finish this sentence.
 
Is the manual really outdated, or has the game just developed into a line that does not much represent the manual anymore?... and when newer updates further diminish the genius apparent in the manual (such as allowing leader promotion without skill penalty) - I would say that the current game is "going backwards" as regards that feature.
I am starting to believe you have some sort-of semi-religious belief in the HoI manual.

I never said leaders are purely for 'flavour', I use logistical wizards when at peace as well as they do free up IC as you and Pang have shown. I am just stating you are completely over-emphasising them massively if you're not going to play the game because of it. As Titan said, play TRM with this supposedly massive bonus the player now has and see if you can win.
 
I suggest you to explore AoD 1.08 without prejudices. It has some weaknesses, true. But asking the game to follow a very outdated manual is just wrong.

While I won't load v1.08 right now, I took your advice and did "explore" as regards the changes listed for the patch.

It states, "New button to remove all leaders". Is this a joke?

Do I need say more to rest my case that the devs totally lost the genius of the manual (presumably because they are of the prejudice that it is out dated) as regards the game enhancement of using leaders?

I think it is time to revisit the manual and resurrect the vision for leaders that was put there with the pure genius of whoever wrote the manual. Maybe then people will believe how most wrong the v1.07 handling of leader promotion is.

And v1.08 has come up with a STUPENDOUS fix for the leader error done in 1.07. LET'S JUST REMOVE ALL LEADERS TOTALLY. WOW!

It is because of this fact that I now feel rather justified by having made the otherwise really horrible comparison to RISK. Hey, we don't need leaders to play a war game. We can all just play with the mathematical modifiers encoded in the game engine.

No thank you, I'll dig thru the manual now and try to instill some genius (and common sense) back into this otherwise most remarkable game.
 
Seriously play AoD and then see if you still compare it too Risk. Your opinions are just so out of touch with reality now to put it politely. :)
 
Seriously play AoD and then see if you still compare it too Risk. Your opinions are just so out of touch with reality now to put it politely. :)

I have been playing AoD for nearly 10 years years, (staring with HoI2, then DD, and finally AoD v1.04). And if you think that then please read the next post for a "true reality check".
 
And v1.08 has come up with a STUPENDOUS fix for the leader error done in 1.07. LET'S JUST REMOVE ALL LEADERS TOTALLY. WOW!
This option is so players can get a list of all their leaders so they can completely re-organise where the leaders are used, it doesn't remove them altogether.
 
The manual states:

(Bold added by me for emphasis)

Keeping Up To Date
Paradox is deeply committed to its customers and in my experience their product support is almost unparalleled in the gaming industry. The developers read (and frequently participate in) the discussions on the public forums and will often implement some of the best player-requested features or enhancements post release. They also make minor tweaks or alterations to existing features and squish the occasional bug that had previously escaped detection.

Command, Leadership and Experience
The effectiveness of a force relies heavily on its previous combat experience and on the officers that you assign to your front-line commands. Each time a unit engages in battle, it will gain some valuable combat experience and over time and repeated conflict it will begin performing noticeably better. The resulting veteran units may become the backbone of your armed forces, but as they suffer casualties their losses will be replenished with green recruits which, not surprisingly, dilute their effectiveness.

Individual units may be instructed to act independently, but most often you will wish to group them into larger forces - often using a mixture of unit types to achieve the desired overall balance and combat effectiveness. Commanding larger numbers of units requires special leadership skills that are possessed by only a handful of people, so you will need to draw from a pool of your officers, assigning someone to lead each of your forces. Various officers will have different skills or areas of expertise, so selecting the right man for the job can be extremely beneficial. Each officer also has his own level of combat experience which will increase as you continue to employ him.

You may find that at some point you may wish to promote him to an even higher rank in your military, increasing the number of individual units he can command without incurring a penalty. Junior ranked officers tend to accumulate experience more rapidly than senior ones, however, so this will often prove to be something of a balancing act.

Very large-scale operations bring an added level of complexity to the overall command. It is one thing to issue orders to a collection of divisions all occupying the same general location, but another thing entirely to manage multiple army groups, whole armies, or even multiple armies assembled along a front. In such instances, you will likely need to establish special headquarters divisions: a unit unsuited for direct combat, but one that improves the overall supply efficiency of large numbers of forces and gives them a greater likelihood of achieving positive results.

When you are considering massive offensives or the defense of an entire front, this special division can have a dramatic effect on the overall success of your operations. In a larger sense, however, you will always be in ultimate control of your military and it will be up to you to plan your attacks and arrange for suitable defense of your territories.

AoD includes some handy features that make it as easy as possible to coordinate your forces and use them to maximum effect, and to assign long-term missions that your officers will then proceed to carry out unless you instruct them to do otherwise. Leadership and experience simply help to determine how effective they will be in fulfilling your orders.End of Abstract from manual.

AND ALL THIS “PURE GENIOUS and VISION” has been changed to a click of a button “to remove all leaders” according to v1.08 published changes.

Literally, where can I go and cry for the injustice done to Arsenal of Democracy?


And my comparison to RISK was precisely limited to "no leaders in RISK" versus "now nearly no leaders in 1.08 " (if you click the button). If you fail to see the comparison of "no leaders in one game" and "the diminishment of leaders as per free promotion" in v1.07 then you failed to see my analogy which makes the point that "LEADERS ARE ONE OF THE IMPORTANT ENHANCEMENTS" in this game, and the current trend of minimizing the thought and care that was needed to use them to maximum effect is not doing this game any favors.
 
And my comparison to RISK was precisely limited to "no leaders in RISK" versus "now nearly no leaders in 1.08 " (if you click the button). If you fail to see the comparison of "no leaders in one game" and "the diminishment of leaders as per free promotion" in v1.07 then you failed to see my analogy which makes the point that "LEADERS ARE ONE OF THE IMPORTANT ENHANCEMENTS" in this game, and the current trend of minimizing the thought and care that was needed to use them to maximum effect is not doing this game any favors.
Most of what you just quoted is rhetoric IMO, experience has always had little effect (or certainly not the effects so claimed in the manual) in combat in both HoI2 and AoD. The remove leaders button is so you can re-organise where you want your leaders, it doesn't remove them permanently. :wacko: There are an immense variety of differences between Risk and AoD, if you think leaders are the only (or main) one, you are mistaken (by quite some margin).
 
This option is so players can get a list of all their leaders so they can completely re-organise where the leaders are used, it doesn't remove them altogether.

Well, I read English...and it said ""New button to remove all leaders".

I am greatly relieved by your timely intervention that doing that is only a tool to help organize them. But confused because an earlier patch which did a FANTASTIC job of fixing the leader organization regarding much easier use by humans. What a chore it was before we could find leaders by trait or name. Remember?

Wish they had improved finding convoys if manually running them instead of still better organization for finding leaders.

But this misses the point - which is what was done to leaders in v1.07, and the fact - in the wisdom of the manual - leader selection and promotion should be a major modifier for battle success. And using leaders properly should be a major factor, as important as decisions to build properly, and plan a campaign properly. The bonus to the human should not be a plus if you use leaders for maximum effect against the AI, but instead be such a negative if one fails to use them to maximum effect that the AI will walk all over human if one disregards the importance of leader considerations.

Yes, I do have great respect for the wisdom I see in the manual. I think "calling it out of date" is rather insulting to the author, who I deem showed more genius than I see in the v1.07 patch that changed leaders in a major way (big free bonus to the human player).

Of course I am going to play the game even if my whole army can now hit the board as Field Marshals with incredible skill. And I fully am preparing to do TRM - because of the greater challenge. I already have blitzed my way to Bitter Peace many times, and my complaint is, "It is too easy". And v1.07 having just given me an OKW of super leaders (even if their effects are minimized by game mathematics) does not make it a better game. But I am most certain TRM will more than compensate.
 
Last edited:
AFAIK hitting 'Remove all leaders' just removes current leader assignments - then the game enging quickly assigns new leaders (or you can do it manually)? A handy feature if you ask me.

But there should be skill loss upon promotion. Alternatively make it a modable parameter.
 
Most of what you just quoted is rhetoric IMO, experience has always had little effect (or certainly not the effects so claimed in the manual) in combat in both HoI2 and AoD. There are an immense variety of differences between Risk and AoD, if you think leaders are the only (or main) one, you are mistaken (by quite some margin).

"NO", Mr_B0narpte, I do not think that. I believe I implied that reducing the importance of leaders in AoD was a step "backwards" to the level of games like RISK and AXIS and ALLIES. The reduced proper management of leaders (because they can now all be Field Marshals with unbelievable skill level) was the step backwards which I compared to the irrelevancy of leaders in other games. The rest of AoD has absolutely no comparison to those games. Let's please not imply what the other has not intended.
 
While I won't load v1.08 right now, I took your advice and did "explore" as regards the changes listed for the patch.

It states, "New button to remove all leaders". Is this a joke?

Do I need say more to rest my case that the devs totally lost the genius of the manual (presumably because they are of the prejudice that it is out dated) as regards the game enhancement of using leaders?

I think it is time to revisit the manual and resurrect the vision for leaders that was put there with the pure genius of whoever wrote the manual. Maybe then people will believe how most wrong the v1.07 handling of leader promotion is.

And v1.08 has come up with a STUPENDOUS fix for the leader error done in 1.07. LET'S JUST REMOVE ALL LEADERS TOTALLY. WOW!

It is because of this fact that I now feel rather justified by having made the otherwise really horrible comparison to RISK. Hey, we don't need leaders to play a war game. We can all just play with the mathematical modifiers encoded in the game engine.

No thank you, I'll dig thru the manual now and try to instill some genius (and common sense) back into this otherwise most remarkable game.

:laugh: what a tirade !

Remove all leaders button does not remove the leaders from the game, they just unassigns them from all divisions, instead of clicking each division's button Remove. It is useful when you start the game with Auto-assign option and want to re-assign manually all of them, or when you have all Logistic Wizards during peace time and you replace them before the war starts.

The fact that you don't lose skill points when promoting doesn't bother me, but I will make it configurable in 1.09. No one forces you to promote all of your generals right from the start, as well as you are not forced to build nothing but infantry from the start of the game to the end or whatever one can spam exploiting the game engine for some purpose, in disfavor of realism.

LE: I see there were several more replies in the same time with mine, explaining what the new button does, so sorry for being superfluous :)
 
Last edited:
AFAIK hitting 'Remove all leaders' just removes current leader assignments - then the game enging quickly assigns new leaders (or you can do it manually)? A handy feature if you ask me.

But there should be skill loss upon promotion. Alternatively make it a modable parameter.

Yes, certainly a "handy feature". And this makes my point perfectly. Try finding that essential leader you know you got somewhere amongst your army in the heat of battle. Consider the one week delay to make him effective and work up the solution to getting him on your stack without the whole stack losing ORG. Or just promote the guy you got on the stack into a skill O because a Field Marshal is needed. And besides, you are more diverted by the enemy fighters crushing your air force at this moment anyway.

Of course, the reason to find that best leader you know you got, move your troops to get him on the stack so the full stack isn't penalized, and delay your whole assault by a week because you screwed up not putting him on in time in the first place doesn't matter if the benefits for doing all that are minor compared to the significance of not having a true Rommel taking charge (versus most any Panzer guy that can now also be Rommel).

The point I am trying to sanely make is that anything less than maximum use of leaders should have such significant modifiers that one will lose battles if one neglects their due attention. But, if the leader skill and trait bonuses are not significant enough, then it really doesn't matter what leader is where, or the fact that little is lost by simply turning them into Field Marshals just using what is on stack, as the occasion for over stacking arises. The debate is "watered down leaders" versus "important decisions to use leaders" to avoid negative battle results. And v1.07 has succeeded in watering down the importance of leader management.

And if Mr_BOnarpte thinks the manual is just rhetoric, he has totally failed to see my view that it is wisdom for what would be a more challenging game to play. Wouldn't it be Grand if installing TRM also automatically disabled all the auto functions he uses to play with. Try stretching the human concentration to breaking point and see how much that benefits the Ruskies!
 
Last edited:
Remove all leaders button does not remove the leaders from the game, they just unassigns them from all divisions. It is useful when you start the game with Auto-assign option and want to re-assign manually all of them, or when you have all Logistic Wizards during peace time and you replace them before the war starts.

Got that, and a very handy feature indeed.

The fact that you don't lose skill points when promoting doesn't bother me,

Well, I wish it would.


but I will make it configurable in 1.09.

GREAT!

No one forces you to promote all of your generals right from the start...

True, but the point is you can promote any one you wish without incurring the penalty that should be applied, and be fairer to the AI, while also straining the human to cope effectively with all that is required. Leader management does not fall in the class of sending out ships and aircraft on month long missions because the human can not manage all that. But leader management - tweeked properly - is a very great game enhancement.
 
And if Mr_BOnarpte thinks the manual is just rhetoric, he has totally failed to see my view that it is wisdom for what would be a more challenging game to play. Wouldn't it be Grand if installing TRM also automatically disabled all the auto functions he uses to play with. Try stretching the human concentration to breaking point and see how much that benefits the Ruskies!
I am saying it is rhetoric when compared to the actual situation in HoI2 and AoD, I would like it to become reality if possible, but there are much more important things to be improved upon IMO. You can pause the game then choose all the leaders anyway, it wouldn't (or shouldn't) stretch concentration when fighting your enemies in the game. I think it would be "Grand" if you actually played TRM. :)
 
I think we should consider a different approach of penalty when promoting leaders, since we know that before the generals would lose all existing experience for the current skill level when promoted. It isn't fair that a promoted general with 99% experience until the next skill level, when promoted is one full skill point less than a general with 100% experience which translated into one more skill point and 0% experience. So I think when promoted, the generals should lose from experience instead of just reseting the experience to 0% and substracting one skill point. The amount of experience lost should be relative to XP table needed to advance from one skill to the next.
 
I think it would be "Grand" if you actually played TRM. :)

So do I. As you know, I am waiting for your AAR to conclude before I start "Mein Kampf".

So, where is the Russian Front anyway? Update, please?